NUKES, JAPAN, AND WWII
September 14, 2006
by: jovial_cynic
by: jovial_cynic
I've been in a debate with a fellow that goes by "Concerned Citizen" over at Mark Glesne's blog about nationalism, and my general disdain for it. Somehow, the conversation spiraled out of control, and we're currently debating the United States' use of nuclear bombs on Japan. That got brought up because this Concerned Citizen argued that the production and use of chemical and biological weapons by "evil" countries was immoral, so I added that perhaps the use of nuclear bombs isn't any better.
So... he posts this:
We dropped an nuclear weapon on a fanatical enemy in a time of war when they refused to surrender. We dropped the second one for the same reasons. We dropped a nuclear weapon to save the millions of lives that would have been lost if we had to take Japan conventionally.
And that seems to help him sleep at night when he goes over all of his reasons for why America is so fantastic. Our dropping a couple of nuclear bombs on men, women, and children served to prevent the loss of millions of lives.
I did some of my own research to see what the history books say about the bombing of Japan, and it looks like some high-ranking folks disagree with the Concerned Citizen.
Read through that page and see what some high-ranking folks seemed to think about using nuclear bombs on a country that apparently was going to surrender anyway. There's some pretty weighty comments. In particular, I think this one is pretty damning:
ADMIRAL WILLIAM D. LEAHY
(Chief of Staff to Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman)
"It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.
"The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."
So... yeah. There you go. There's your history lesson for the day.
So... he posts this:
We dropped an nuclear weapon on a fanatical enemy in a time of war when they refused to surrender. We dropped the second one for the same reasons. We dropped a nuclear weapon to save the millions of lives that would have been lost if we had to take Japan conventionally.
And that seems to help him sleep at night when he goes over all of his reasons for why America is so fantastic. Our dropping a couple of nuclear bombs on men, women, and children served to prevent the loss of millions of lives.
I did some of my own research to see what the history books say about the bombing of Japan, and it looks like some high-ranking folks disagree with the Concerned Citizen.
Read through that page and see what some high-ranking folks seemed to think about using nuclear bombs on a country that apparently was going to surrender anyway. There's some pretty weighty comments. In particular, I think this one is pretty damning:
ADMIRAL WILLIAM D. LEAHY
(Chief of Staff to Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman)
"It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.
"The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."
So... yeah. There you go. There's your history lesson for the day.
